In the Mahasatipatthana sutta can someone tell me the difference between the 3rd (citta sati) and 4th (dhamma sati) foundation? I've read several definitions, but I still can't find a good definition of how these are experienced differently (versus just a technical definition).

The best example I read so far is 3)seeing something in your peripheral vision versus 4)looking right at it. Does someone here has a better analogy (?)

As far as I understand it, the 3rd satipatthana is observing the mind condition itself, while the 4th is more about observing the ways of interactions of hindrances and factors of enlightenment.

In other words, 3rd is: "Aha, here what i see - the mind is filled with greed and i see this greed directly". The 4th is: "Hm, while i'm applying this perception of unattractiveness in the present moment, I see how it subdues this very greed". In both cases you "see directly". But the objects of this vision are different. In the first case it is the state of mind, in the second case it is the processes that can affect the states of mind.

I recommend that you read Venerable Analayo's classic: Satipatthana: the direct path to realization.

Very basically, the third and fourth satipatthanas refer to the mental state (citta) and mental contents (dhamma). The third and fourth satipatthanas contain with it instructions on observing the mental state (mind) or the mental contents (mental qualities).

C. Mind

"And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion.

"When the mind is constricted, he discerns that the mind is constricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is enlarged. When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When the mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the mind is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind is not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is not released, he discerns that the mind is not released.

"In this way he remains focused internally on the mind in & of itself, or externally on the mind in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the mind in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the mind, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the mind, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the mind. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a mind' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the mind in & of itself.

D. Mental Qualities

"And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves?

[1] "There is the case where a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances. And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances? There is the case where, there being sensual desire present within, a monk discerns that 'There is sensual desire present within me.' Or, there being no sensual desire present within, he discerns that 'There is no sensual desire present within me.' He discerns how there is the arising of unarisen sensual desire. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of sensual desire once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no future arising of sensual desire that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining hindrances: ill will, sloth & drowsiness, restlessness & anxiety, and uncertainty.)

"In this way he remains focused internally on mental qualities in & of themselves, or externally on mental qualities in & of themselves, or both internally & externally on mental qualities in & of themselves. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to mental qualities, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to mental qualities, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to mental qualities. Or his mindfulness that 'There are mental qualities' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances.

[2] "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five clinging-aggregates. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five clinging-aggregates? There is the case where a monk [discerns]: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception... Such are fabrications... Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'

"In this way he remains focused internally on the mental qualities in & of themselves, or focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five clinging-aggregates....http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

kind regards,

Ben

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Zom, I have a question about what you said.As I understand what you say,

#3 is noticing one's mind is full of greed in the moment,#4, You notice how the greed subsides (as an automatic result) of you observing it.

Am I correct?

Well, greed won't subdue if you just observe it. Actually Buddha said in MN 2, that this practice of "just observing defilements and doing nothing" is incorrect. Such kind of tolerance and passive observing is actual for other things, not defilements:

"And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by tolerating? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, endures. He tolerates cold, heat, hunger, & thirst; the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, & reptiles; ill-spoken, unwelcome words & bodily feelings that, when they arise, are painful, racking, sharp, piercing, disagreeable, displeasing, & menacing to life".

And concerning defilements - the right practice is to put effort to remove them as soon as they intruded the mind:

"And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by destroying? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, does not tolerate an arisen thought of sensuality. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence.

Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate an arisen thought of ill will...

Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate an arisen thought of cruelty...

Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate arisen evil, unskillful mental qualities. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, & wipes them out of existence. The fermentations, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to destroy these things do not arise for him when he destroys them. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by destroying".

So the right thing is to notice, how greed subsides when you use skilful methods to subdue it (listed, for example, in MN 20). However, that is a bit off topic. The main point is that the 4th satipatthana is about direct seeing the workings of all these methods. For example, if you never use in practice 4th satipatthana, you will never get direct knowledge that these or that practical methods really work (in the present moment, in the "now"). That is why it is so important to practise.

And even more than that. Practising 4th satipatthana you can also see (directly) how defilements arise, if you direct your mind onto some object. For example, you "establish mindfulness in 4th satipatthana" and direct your mind onto some picture with some tasty food. If your mindfulness is strong enough, you will see how this directing results in immediate arising of desire, craving for food. Seeing how this very process happening - is the 4th satipatthana. Now, after that, when craving intruded your mind, you can switch your mindfulness to 3rd satipatthana. And directly observe the craving (passion) itself - just see how it feels, how your mind is conditioned by it, how it is disturbed and distorted by it, how it suddenly became turbid. Seeing this mind state in the present moment means that you are practising mindfulness established in 3rd satipatthana.

I think you could look at the this the other way round too, ie how state of mind ( 3rd frame ) colours and influences the mind objects which arise ( 4th frame ).

The thing is that "hindrance" is not a mind object, but is a state of the mind itself. Now what are they, these hindrances? These are different states of mind: greedy mind, angry mind, lazy mind, doubful mind, so on. That is why there should be the difference between "greedy mind of 3rd satipatthana" and "greedy mind of 4th satipatthana". Many suttas tell us that 4th satipatthana is "5 hindrances vs 7 factors of enlightenment". Also many suttas in satipatthana samyutta in SN, mentioning 5 hindrances vs 7 factors of enlightenment, speak about the workings and correlation processes of these 2 camps - hindrances and bojjangas (enlightenment factors). Taking this information into account, you start to see how to understand practice of 4th satipatthana properly. And how it differs from the 3rd one.

Last edited by Zom on Tue Apr 23, 2013 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

Since I am mainly interested in *examples* of what the *experience* between 3 and 4 is (I already am aware of the technical definition/description), am I correct to say that:

in 3: I see delicious food, my mouth waters, and I become aware of my mouth watering in the moment as the result of seeing the food.in 4: I look away from the food and back towards the food over and over again and notice how my mouth starts and stops watering as a result of eye contact with it.

in 3: I see delicious food, my mouth waters, and I become aware of my mouth watering in the moment as the result of seeing the food.in 4: I look away from the food and back towards the food over and over again and notice how my mouth starts and stops watering as a result of eye contact with it.

Both are 4th satipatthana, because here you are taking notice of the processes themselves. If you practise 3rd satipatthana, there is no need to observe processes, conditionings between eye-object-mind-defilements. Once you have a greedy mind, you just look onto this state: how it feels, how it is, when "you are obsessed with desire or, lets say, anger... or doubt.. ect.".

Some people say that Buddhism doesnt speak about such things as "emotions". But as I see it, it does. You observe emotions (that is different mind states) just right in the 3rd satipatthana. When there is an "emotion", that means that your mind is in some sort of "exciting" condition. And so you inquire what is that condition exactly, how it can be labeled properly. Maybe mind is very excited and is vibrating because of .... greed. Or ...anger? Or maybe - not because of defilements, but because of pure happiness or rapture? You detect it, observe it. Or maybe mind is very calm and concentrated? You also take notice of that, inspect this your condition. And all that falls into 3rd satipatthana.

And when you ask and inquire "why and how, from where does this condition happen and how does it subside?" - you are switching to 4th satipatthana.

Actually, in real practice you may switch between all 4 satipatthanas very quickly. All this practice in general can be just called "looking inside and inspecting inner world". Four satipatthanas are just emphasises, acents on these or that things in the inner world. Obviously enough, they cover everything. If you will drop and totally ignore one satipatthana, there will be a "blind spot" in the inner-world-observing practice.

catlady2112 wrote:Since I am mainly interested in *examples* of what the *experience* between 3 and 4 is (I already am aware of the technical definition/description), am I correct to say that:

in 3: I see delicious food, my mouth waters, and I become aware of my mouth watering in the moment as the result of seeing the food.in 4: I look away from the food and back towards the food over and over again and notice how my mouth starts and stops watering as a result of eye contact with it.

This is a good example, but your description perhaps focusses too much on the physical. I think I see what you mean, but would place "mouth watering" in the "body" category.

So I would change 3 ("mind state" or "mood) to the general lust for food, and 4 to the specific thoughts and desires that arise as one sees the various foods.

There are different ways to interpreting the instructions in dhammas/phenomena section. Above, viewtopic.php?f=19&t=16958#p242140 Zom emphasises classification. The way I practice, I'm more interested in noticing as many of the various phenomena that arise as possible, than on strict classification (which I find can be distracting if overdone). So I tend to take the sutta as providing examples of things that one might notice, not as strict instructions to classify everything that arises. However, I do find that analysis into categories can be helpful in understanding the nature of the arising and ceasing phenomena ("This is coming up all the time, it seems to be the hindrance of...").

I just asked a Buddhist Theravadin monk with my example about food and he said the difference between 3 and 4 is that:3: You recognize your mouth waters when you see a piece of cake4: You can trace back all conditions that came together to make this happen. For example, a memory file of eating cake, experiences, childhood, etc.

Very basically, the third and fourth satipatthanas refer to the mental state (citta) and mental contents (dhamma). The third and fourth satipatthanas contain with it instructions on observing the mental state (mind) or the mental contents (mental qualities).

"It's easy for us to connect with what's wrong with us... and not so easy to feel into, or to allow us, to connect with what's right and what's good in us."

Zom wrote:The thing is that "hindrance" is not a mind object, but is a state of the mind itself. Now what are they, these hindrances? These are different states of mind: greedy mind, angry mind, lazy mind, doubful mind, so on. That is why there should be the difference between "greedy mind of 3rd satipatthana" and "greedy mind of 4th satipatthana".

I see what you're saying, but it still seems odd that the 5 hindrances are included in the 4th frame and not the 3rd frame. Perhaps the 3rd frame is a greedy mind, while the 4th frame is a greedy thought?

"I ride tandem with the random, Things don't run the way I planned them, In the humdrum."Peter Gabriel lyric